To all the people complaining about Sony not having showed the console itself: I guess we weren't supposed to see ANY hardware. The only reason we saw the controller is because there were some leaked pictures so they had to come out with it and show it to us.

Do you really think they'd show the REAL good stuff before E3? NO WAY! Imagine that... Sony shows controller+CONSOLE+much more games on February 20th --> all people are hyped for Microsoft at E3, NOT Sony. But Sony is in an advantage at the moment. They told us that there IS a PS4, showed the new controller and some software. And that's okay and more than enough. Then at E3 show the real deal. Blow us away with an amazing but simple design, great tech and stunningly beautiful games. Why? Because Microsoft will do exactly that. So Sony must not waste their "ammo" before E3.

Btw, it doesn't matter if we're happy with the specs or not. They won't change it, no matter what we say. But I'm quite happy. The only thing so far that I think COULD be better is the CPU, but I guess it's quite good and sufficient. 8gigs of ram - great. But I took it as "the 8GB of GDDR5 RAM will be used by the CPU and GPU" - right? Or is there a dedicated RAM JUST for the GPU? Because someone said that there will be additional RAM for the GPU. If that was true, it would mean that the GPU itself has its own RAM BUT can access the 8GB GDDR5 system memory. But I don't believe that there's additional GPU RAM. Just the 8gigs GDDR5.

I always thought that "GDDR" types of RAM is only available for GPUs, or am I missing something?

We all know deep down inside they were right not showing the entire thing and I doubt we heard everything the PS4 is offering as a console. Even though some "source" or developer said it was 2Ghz CPU doesn't mean it's true, it could be more than that. It could be around 2.5GHz or even 2.8GHz which isn't impossible at all and will still be cool. Remember, this is a whole different ballgame with these next console. 1.6GHz was just silly to even talk about and those rumors were just lame anyway.

As for E3, I see even a lot of previous XBOX supporters excited about what Sony is going to pull off at E3 with more PS4 news. It is actually very important that Microsoft gets spanked with the next consoles. If they do, they might start playing a bit more nice to it's gamer base.

it all depends on design, its actually harder to keep a desk top cool, then a lap top, and the CPU is not the problem.

I can assure you that the CPU IS the problem.

Have you ever checked the operating temperature of a laptop with a mobile i7 core? Even stripped down to the mobile standards it will normally exceed 80C during heavy use. It will idle at around 50C, which is about 20C hotter than the more robust desktop i7 will idle at.

Heat is very much a factor. If you were to try to use laptop cooling on a desktop CPU you would melt it. That's why laptops use lower power CPUs.

As i said, i just did a quick google search for the 7800 series (which the RSX is based on) and that's the first number i found. I did a better search now and this is what i found:http://www.hardware-infos.com/grafikkarten_nvidia.php
7800 GTX 110 nm 16-24-24-8 430/600 256 Bit 10,3 GT/s 200 Gflops
7900 GTX 90 nm 16-24-24-8 650/800 256 Bit 15,6 GT/s 301 Gflops

Looking at the RSX specs in the wiki link it looks like the PS3 GPU's performance is somewhere between the 7800 and the 7900gtx. But it depends on how reliable that info is. It certainly isn't 7900gtx quality, so it should be under it. Even so, PS4 GPU is an immense step up and certainly more than just "3.5x" that of the PS3.

As i said, i just did a quick google search for the 7800 series (which the RSX is based on) and that's the first number i found. I did a better search now and this is what i found:http://www.hardware-infos.com/grafikkarten_nvidia.php
7800 GTX 110 nm 16-24-24-8 430/600 256 Bit 10,3 GT/s 200 Gflops
7900 GTX 90 nm 16-24-24-8 650/800 256 Bit 15,6 GT/s 301 Gflops

Looking at the RSX specs in the wiki link it looks like the PS3 GPU's performance is somewhere between the 7800 and the 7900gtx. But it depends on how reliable that info is. It certainly isn't 7900gtx quality, so it should be under it. Even so, PS4 GPU is an immense step up and certainly more than just "3.5x" that of the PS3.

That is certainly correct. It is common knowledge that the xbox360 GPU (Xenos) is faster than the RSX adn Xenos only gets 220Gflops. RSX is about the same (slightly less) and the actual usable/programmable real world flops are even less.

Trust me, the real world jump is between 8x - 10x

I wonder when a nuclear warhead goes off, does the frame rate of real life drop?

That is certainly correct. It is common knowledge that the xbox360 GPU (Xenos) is faster than the RSX adn Xenos only gets 220Gflops. RSX is about the same (slightly less) and the actual usable/programmable real world flops are even less.

Trust me, the real world jump is between 8x - 10x

Guess if the PS4 does pull off those GigaFLOPS then it will be quite an increase in power!

To all the people complaining about Sony not having showed the console itself: I guess we weren't supposed to see ANY hardware. The only reason we saw the controller is because there were some leaked pictures so they had to come out with it and show it to us.

Do you really think they'd show the REAL good stuff before E3? NO WAY! Imagine that... Sony shows controller+CONSOLE+much more games on February 20th --> all people are hyped for Microsoft at E3, NOT Sony. But Sony is in an advantage at the moment. They told us that there IS a PS4, showed the new controller and some software. And that's okay and more than enough. Then at E3 show the real deal. Blow us away with an amazing but simple design, great tech and stunningly beautiful games. Why? Because Microsoft will do exactly that. So Sony must not waste their "ammo" before E3.

Btw, it doesn't matter if we're happy with the specs or not. They won't change it, no matter what we say. But I'm quite happy. The only thing so far that I think COULD be better is the CPU, but I guess it's quite good and sufficient. 8gigs of ram - great. But I took it as "the 8GB of GDDR5 RAM will be used by the CPU and GPU" - right? Or is there a dedicated RAM JUST for the GPU? Because someone said that there will be additional RAM for the GPU. If that was true, it would mean that the GPU itself has its own RAM BUT can access the 8GB GDDR5 system memory. But I don't believe that there's additional GPU RAM. Just the 8gigs GDDR5.

I always thought that "GDDR" types of RAM is only available for GPUs, or am I missing something?

There have been reports saying they didn't show the console because there was features that they didn't want know about just yet. This could be good, could be bad. I know that could also be a cop out to cover that it's not finished but I don't see any harm in saying it's not ready and final design is not complete. But just gives more flame to the fire doubters have started.

There have been reports saying they didn't show the console because there was features that they didn't want know about just yet. This could be good, could be bad. I know that could also be a cop out to cover that it's not finished but I don't see any harm in saying it's not ready and final design is not complete. But just gives more flame to the fire doubters have started.

Like i said, could be covering their tracks instead of saying it's not final. I find it laughable that people are nitpicking about not seeing the console just to discredit all the positives they saw. Not pointing at you but it's definitely naysayers finding something to $#@! about.

Like i said, could be covering their tracks instead of saying it's not final. I find it laughable that people are nitpicking about not seeing the console just to discredit all the positives they saw. Not pointing at you but it's definitely naysayers finding something to $#@! about.

I don't even bother with them. A box of plastic that you never even see under your TV table is the most important part of the presentation you know

I wonder when a nuclear warhead goes off, does the frame rate of real life drop?

Like i said, could be covering their tracks instead of saying it's not final. I find it laughable that people are nitpicking about not seeing the console just to discredit all the positives they saw. Not pointing at you but it's definitely naysayers finding something to $#@! about.

Like i said, could be covering their tracks instead of saying it's not final. I find it laughable that people are nitpicking about not seeing the console just to discredit all the positives they saw. Not pointing at you but it's definitely naysayers finding something to $#@! about.

Well, I didn't really care either way, but I can understand,given how far out from launch we are, why Sony hasn't shown, its likely still being designed. As I have said, I cant find fault withe the system.

Well, I didn't really care either way, but I can understand,given how far out from launch we are, why Sony hasn't shown, its likely still being designed. As I have said, I cant find fault withe the system.

I know you have voiced your opinion about the specs. You don't have any problems with it from what I've seen. I just don't understand all the focus on not seeing the case itself. They did provide other concrete evidence that many didn't even expect before the reveal. I guess everyone is just so used to seeing a console with a reveal. I liked the fact that we saw specs instead. They simply wanted to take away some thunder from MS at the expense of not showing a final version ( I'm sure that is the reason why not the other reasons reported.) They have E3 to show off all that jazz.

Like I said before, 2GHZ is right at the top limit of what AMD says the Jaguar CPU can do. Yields at that speed will be low, and since the APU is custom that means that any processor that isn't reliable at that speed will have to be thrown in the trash at Sony's expense.

Like I said before, 2GHZ is right at the top limit of what AMD says the Jaguar CPU can do. Yields at that speed will be low, and since the APU is custom that means that any processor that isn't reliable at that speed will have to be thrown in the trash at Sony's expense.

It's simple economics.

And that fact that its custom can't mean that it has a little more wiggle room as far as clock speeds go?
Both ps4 and xbox aren't using off the shelf jaguars and I highly doubt AMD has released info on custom chips for unannouced platforms.

2GHz maybe pushing too much but 1.8GHz may still happen

I wonder when a nuclear warhead goes off, does the frame rate of real life drop?

And that fact that its custom can't mean that it has a little more wiggle room as far as clock speeds go?

The fact that it has twice the cores of a normal Jaguar means it's twice as complex. Do you really believe that you can take something that is twice as complex, push it faster than it was originally designed to do, and get better reliability from it?

Both ps4 and xbox aren't using off the shelf jaguars and I highly doubt AMD has released info on custom chips for unannouced platforms.

2GHz maybe pushing too much but 1.8GHz may still happen

Don't count on it.

What are the benefits? Will the benefits translate into enough additional sales to make the expense of lower production yields worth it? This is a financial decision that could easily cost billions. If you get it wrong..... think 360 RROD all over again, only this time Sony would be the one to pay for it.

1.6GHZ is reliable. Yields will be high, reliability will be high, and it will do everything they need it to do. Why try to push it faster and run the risk of introducing production and reliability problems?

The fact that it has twice the cores of a normal Jaguar means it's twice as complex. Do you really believe that you can take something that is twice as complex, push it faster than it was originally designed to do, and get better reliability from it?

I know you have voiced your opinion about the specs. You don't have any problems with it from what I've seen. I just don't understand all the focus on not seeing the case itself. They did provide other concrete evidence that many didn't even expect before the reveal. I guess everyone is just so used to seeing a console with a reveal. I liked the fact that we saw specs instead. They simply wanted to take away some thunder from MS at the expense of not showing a final version ( I'm sure that is the reason why not the other reasons reported.) They have E3 to show off all that jazz.

I didn't even realize they hadn't shown it until I saw articles, so it shows you how much I care about the plastic box it comes in, I was far more interested in what inside it.

At the end of the day how big or small or light or thin a mobile device (phone/tablet/netbook) does make a difference, but a piece of plastic you shove under you TV? Least important aspect of the machine.

I didn't even realize they hadn't shown it until I saw articles, so it shows you how much I care about the plastic box it comes in, I was far more interested in what inside it.

At the end of the day how big or small or light or thin a mobile device (phone/tablet/netbook) does make a difference, but a piece of plastic you shove under you TV? Least important aspect of the machine.

Same here. I don't know why so many focused on it but I guess we will leave it at that. I made a thread about it if you care to join in that conversation. Continue on.

Posting Permissions

PlayStation Universe

Copyright 2006-2014 7578768 Canada Inc. All Right Reserved.

Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written
permission of Abstract Holdings International Ltd. prohibited.Use of this site is governed
by our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.